December 4, 2009

"I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue. I don't have a problem with that. I don't know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think that members of the electorate still want answers," she replied.

"Do you think it's a fair question to be looking at?" Humphries persisted.

"I think it's a fair question, just like I think past association and past voting records -- all of that is fair game," Palin said. "The McCain-Palin campaign didn't do a good enough job in that area."

McCain's campaign counsel has said the campaign did look into the birth certificate question and, like every other serious examination, dismissed it.

Palin suggested that the questions were fair play because of "the weird conspiracy theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn't my real son -- 'You need to produce his birth certificate, you need to prove that he's your kid,' which we have done."

But I thought she thought the question of Trig's parentage was not fair. Do 2 unfairs make a fair in her thinking? Is she saying that since people got all "weird" and "freaky" on her, she wants equal treatment for Obama in the "weird" and "freaky" department?

265 comments:

I am sure Andrew Sullivan will have 500 words on this issue before lunch.

The birther issue is really a non issue (the real issue is Obama's college applications and transcripts), but it is nothing compared to the BS over the Trig parentage issue raised by Sullivan. So I understand why she is dishing it out. She wants to focus some of the outrageous attacks on her back at the source.

To me the case is analogous to the fuss over Kerry's military records. A lot of people thought that there must be something juicy if he was refusing to release them, but in the end the "scandal" was that his grades were no better than George Bush's (which I guess is a sort of scandal since Kerry is supposed to be a thoughtful policy wonk while George Bush is supposed to be stupid -- and not even Bush argues that he really tried to apply himself in college).

Best guess is that there's something similarly embarrassing in the original Obama birth certificate -- embarrassing but not disqualifying.

Poorly answered. The correct answer is: it is always legitimate to ask whether someone seeking the presidency meets the qualifications to hold the office spelled out in the consitution. THe candidate has an obligation to produce the proof that s/he is qualified.

In this case, it appears that most people are satisfied that Obama meets the qualifications. Although, Obama could have put all of this to rest immediately by simply producing his actual birth certificate. I don't know why he hasn't done that. Perhaps he likes being able to lable a certain segment of the population as fring.

The birth issue is a Constitutional challenge. No body really wants the crisis from this issue in effect impeaching Obama who IS President. On the other hand she is correct to shoot back as haed as they shoot at her. Politics is a war without bullets. The weapons are slander weapons. Slander does include true statements that defame a person, although the rough and tumble American legal defense version is that truth is a defense in order to make Free Speech possible. Should the Saracuda go for a cheap foul? Not unless the otherside has started a cheap foul intimidation strategy. Hmmm?

Best guess is that there's something similarly embarrassing in the original Obama birth certificate -- embarrassing but not disqualifying

Then why not release the records?

Like Superdad says. All of this happy horsehsit could be put to rest by just disclosing his actual birth certificate and college records. It would a very very simple thing to do. The fact that he won't is what is fueling the controversy.

Hiding information from your employer is grounds for firing in the business world. We are his employers and deserve to have full disclosure.

I agree with superdad in that there's nothing wrong with asking or checking it out, but I certainly think that the people making a big stink about it are going way too far. That quote makes it sound like Palin thinks something similar (but doesn't want to upset the few loud birthers that would throw a fit if she said that outright).

Of course, I support changing that constitutional requirement anyway (I would demand a significant number of years of citizenship, but don't think that people should be dismissed because of the accident of their birth), so it doesn't really bother me.

FWIW, I do suspect that there's something about the birth certificate that he doesn't want out. My guess: I don't know if they listed the child's race on Hawaiian birth certificates at the time, but if they did, wouldn't it be a problem for his image if it lists him as "white" or "caucasian" (like his mom)?

I was under the impression that Hawaii did release a form of his birth certificate, and that the "long-form" that people clamor for didn't exist at the time. I could be wrong on that, this isn't an issue I follow all that closely.

On the other hand, even if there is some further documentation to release, the Obama people might consider giving in to be the wrong message. As it is, no one who might vote for him cares, and they have a loud minority among their opponents that they can point to and say "look at what nutjobs they are".

Regarding the two unfairs question, I'm not sure that she was saying that its a legit issue because of the Trig issue, so much as that people who go after Trig have no room to complain.

BTW, the birth certificate issue is MUCH more relevant (due to the constitutional issue), grounded (because there legitimately is a missing link in the birth certificate case (although I think it's not a big deal AT ALL), but Bristol's actual pregnancy completely disproves the birther's timeline), and it's much less creepy (in a legal documents verses Andrew Sullivan kind of way).

That being said, if Palin starts independantly pushing the birther idea (rather than just answering questions about it in a somewhat weasely fashion), expect me to lose respect for her quite quickly. Hoping (and expecting) that that doesn't happen.

Salamandyr said: "On the other hand, even if there is some further documentation to release, the Obama people might consider giving in to be the wrong message. As it is, no one who might vote for him cares, and they have a loud minority among their opponents that they can point to and say "look at what nutjobs they are"."

Yeah, I think having this out there really helps them a lot more than hurts. In fact, if there is something they could release and end it, they're probably better off not doing it and keeping the nutters fired up. In the same way, I think that Bush was probably helped, at least for a while, by the wild hate from some on the other side- people felt the urge to defend him from it.

Sort of reminds me of that South Park episode where they learn that the 9/11 truthers is a big conspiracy theory in itself.

I'm not a birther but at least the argument can be made that, as others have observed, Obama's place of birth is relevant to his qualification to be president. Trig Palin's parentage is not relevant to Sarah's qualification to be vice-president. The former is a legitimate constitutional question (now answered to my satisfaction), the latter is a vicious ad hominem cast about by a biased media.

I don't think Palin is turning into a birther. I think she is making the point that it is a legitimate subject of debate.

The high ideals of civilised war and gentlemen doing the classy things all the time is so sweet. Bit the Sarah that everybody wants to see is a warrior. The warriors do unto the enemy what the enemy does unto them. The same Japanese Army Units that had conducted the Rape of Nanking later were sent to retake Guadalcanal in a 4 month slogfest. They sent home the message that the Marines they were sent to exterminate without mercy were inhuman criminals that recognised no rules of war. The Marines took that as a great compliment to their refusal to surrender. That attitude is what Sara Palin is running on which is her attitude that she will not retreat and that she will win. Contrasting her confidence in winning to the Liar-in Chief's insistence upon America's defeat has made her a very important leader. Who else can match her in that skill set?

Sarah is just going to use every weapon at hand. She plays hard and is not going to give an inch. Every tool even unfair and bogus ones should be used. After all it is not like she ever got the benefit of the doubt or any slack about anything. So she is justified in throwing this against the wall. Why not?

It occurs to me that she is not a controlled speaker. She sort of chews around an idea verbally, exploring down one mental trail, backtracking, reformulating, suddenly tying it this other occurrence over here...this is not a bad way to think about and deduce new ideas, but it's really not a good idea for a politician to do it in an interview. That sort of verbal thought processes creates ample gotcha moments as journalists can take half-formed ideas and present them as fully formed positions. On the one hand, that she is willing to talk about issues she doesn't have a prepared statement on is to the good, but it is quite inelegant.

It makes her appear to be, and perhaps she is, a mushy thinker. On the other hand, she has a fair record of accomplishment at the posts she has held, which argues there is a sharper mind behind the confused jumble of words. Yet that uncertainty is one of the things making Mitt Romney look very good.

I think that could explain why she is hitching her wagon to the birther nonsense.

I don't think that Palin is a "birther".

I was under the impression that "birther" meant that you doubted that Obama was a U.S. Citizen or that he was born in the United States.

Merely saying that he should provide the same disclosures as all other Candidates for President have done doesn't say that you doubt his birth or that you are a birther. It says that you wonder why he isn't releasing his records and allowing us, his employers, to do a background check.

I'm in the process of hiring and part of that process is a background check (credit and DMV) as well as mandatory live scan fingerprinting. If any candidates refuse or balk at these background checks they are not hired. Why should the President of the United States, who wields a hell of a lot more power than an office clerk or stock broker, be exempt???

Has any other president had to show their birth certificate? I don't recall it ever being asked. Why this one I wonder...

I've been asked to produce a certified copy of my birth certificate for almost every job I've ever had. It's a legitimate requirement. I don't think I've ever seen my original, which still lies with authorities back in Wisconsin.

I think the issue should be the 10%unemployment rate and the current administration's policies which aren't doing anything to mitigate it. I'd vote for a headhunter from Botswana as President if he was an advocate of Adam Smith rather than Karl Marx.

To me the case is analogous to the fuss over Kerry's military records. A lot of people thought that there must be something juicy if he was refusing to release them, but in the end the "scandal" was that his grades were no better than George Bush's (which I guess is a sort of scandal since Kerry is supposed to be a thoughtful policy wonk while George Bush is supposed to be stupid -- and not even Bush argues that he really tried to apply himself in college).

Garage said: "Has any other president had to show their birth certificate? I don't recall it ever being asked. Why this one I wonder..."

Actually, Garage, there was a dispute over Chester A. Arthur's birthplace: http://blog.taragana.com/n/born-in-the-usa-flap-over-obama-recalls-debate-over-chester-arthurs-birthplace-141284/

Recall that we've only really had birth certificates widely distributed for, maybe 100 years, if that. And (while I could be wrong), I'm not aware of any other president of recent memory who lived out of country for so much of his youth, particularly in a way without much documentation (if he had been a military brat, it would be easier to follow, but Obama was just the product of a broken home and flighty mother). Remember also that Obama's father was not American.

In other words, stop making up accusations of racism where there are none and actually think about the issues.

Maybe we can get Dan Rather on the case to come up with a fake but accurate version of the long form.

After two election cycles of reporters obsessing over how many ANG drill weekends GWB attended in Alabama in the 70s, I'm all for reporters going after every scrap of documentation of every politician.

For such a supposed smart guy, Obama sure has been shy about releasing any school records. I'm guessing that he was a low average student who pulled a lot of B's and C's and got some admission breaks due to his heritage. That wouldn't fit the narrative, though.

Salamandyr...The American voting public is the jury she is arguing before. A certain step and fetch it verbal style brings the jury into your reasoning causing them to fill in the rest of the idea/sentence that you inelegantly phrased...several times over. That is a "Trick" that makes the deciders of fact believe that it was really their idea which you planted into them so inelegantly. She is not taking an English exam, she is winning hearts and minds the old fashioned way with a truthful and modest presentation. She is also ignoring Sullivan and CNN and MSNBC except as sympathy devices, and going for the jugular which is election day votes from plain Americans.

@shoutingthomas, you are perfectly correct. But you forget that the press has special rules for prominent Republicans. She not only cannot say anything controversial, but she cannot say anything that can be twisted into something that might -- if one looks at it a certain way -- be controversial.

Just now the overarching purpose of Sarah Palin's life is to sell books. A good chunk of the people she wishes to sell books to are birthers. She knows where the platinum sales are and how to mine them.....The quote as I read it is a hedged statement given so as to provide warmth and comfort to a sector of her book buying public. She is rich, and you are smart.

If that is truly what she's doing, engaging in vague nothings allowing her audience to fill in whatever blanks they would like, I wish she would stop. We've had enough of that. Just look at the disaster our current President, a master of that technique, has been.

It's not even a particularly good strategy, considering that it also lets anyone opposed to you fill in the blanks with whatever insidious thought they'd like to project on you...and when they have a microphone, like the aforementioned CNN & MSNBC, they can reach out to inform the undecided who maybe didn't hear you the first time around, and only get the negative "version".

If this is the case, and I'm not sure it is, I would prefer someone who stated their belief, clearly, cogently, and with no apology. In Palin's case, I stand by my belief stated in the earlier post, she's not trying to be difficult, but she arrives at her conclusions by talking through them, which has the appearance of muddy thinking.

I am a Palin supporter, and I think your comment is accurate. I get the feeling that she is having an interior discussion when she makes a comment like this. She does need to nail down these questions to her own satisfaction before she is asked them. Unfortunately, that will make her a little less charming.

Invariably I find that when someone says "Sarah Palin said X" and you go look it up, she didn't say X.

Had I been asked that, I would have said it's a stupid question in Obama's case, but perhaps in the future we should work out a formal process for vetting Presidential qualifications. The "natural citizen" requirement was written at a time when birth certificates didn't even exist, only family Bibles and such.

Her statement was more ambiguous than I'd like, but it doesn't make her a birther.

As for the "long-form" non-issue, I was adopted when I was two. My birth certificate has the name of my adopted parent. I have never seen the "original long-form", and every time I have proffered my official birth certificate it was accepted without question. The State of Washington prints you out a certified copy whenever you want it, and that is the official, real, legal birth certificate, come hell or highwater--and it says the name of my adopted father on it as my father. Because according to the law, he IS my father.

Sarah was at her cleverest. Suddenly the birthers have new hope that this dumbfuck issue will get them back on the front page.

Stupid as Sarah is, she knows how to play dirty. Obviously someone with so little grasp of reality who contributes only to the national divide is presidential material for the fools that still buy into her.

The birther movement is head up the ass thinking at its most extreme and those who buy into it should be sterilized so they don't reproduce.

Sarah Palin has wised up. She understands that even if she takes the high ground, they won't.

They'll make up whatever stories they want to make her look like some kind of a loon - whether they're true or not. She'll never be in power, so why not have some fun.

Eye for an eye.

Barack Obama was born in Kenya and is an Indonesian Muslim and until he produces a birth certificate, I won't believe otherwise. He should be removed from office, tried as a murdering war criminal, and get the Saddam treatment.

Andrew Sullivan is an AIDS-infected, pot-law breaking foreigner who doesn't belong in this county. Deport his ass.

"At this point, the only reason I want to see President Obama's long-form birth certificate is simply because he doesn't want me to see it."

Ah! a Catch-22! And he probably doesn't want to produce the long-form birth certificate precisely because a gaggle of goons demands he produce it!

(In so doing, Obama would be granting legitimacy to the foolish notions of the perennial lunatic fringe. And who can blame him? If someone declared the citizenship of any of you to be suspect and demand to see your birth certificate, wouldn't your immediate reaction be to say, "Fuck you!"?)

I think there's something a little bit odd about those out there who aren't curious to see the actual birth certificate.

I never saw Eisenhower's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Kennedy's actual birth certificate.

I never say Johnson's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Nixon's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Ford's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Carter's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Reagan's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Bush I's actual birth certficate.

I never saw Clinton's actual birth certificate.

I never saw Bush II's actual birth certificate.

But dad gum it! I need to see Obama's!

Re: qualifications for being President: More important than passing all the Constitutional hurdles, such as they are, is to be elected by voters, IMO. My own opinion is that each party will make sure their candidates qualify before spending money on them.

"Barack Obama was born in Kenya and is an Indonesian Muslim and until he produces a birth certificate, I won't believe otherwise. He should be removed from office, tried as a murdering war criminal, and get the Saddam treatment.

"Andrew Sullivan is an AIDS-infected, pot-law breaking foreigner who doesn't belong in this county. Deport his ass."

And here we have a lovely and representative example of the perennial lunatic fringe.

(Although I do agree with the part about Barry O. being a "murdering war criminal." The B man follows the examples of his predeccesors in office. The American War Criminals Club grows ever larger.)

Hdhouse is the voice of the arrogant elitists who are the backbone of Obama’s America. They are the only ones who can express an opinion or ask a question and the rest of you should shut the fuck up and sit down.

Is Althouse joking? Obama's birth certificate is relevant because of the constituion. It is a STUPID issue because it is settled, but it is also relevant. If you elected me then my Canadian birth would be a legitimate issue. My son's birth would not be.

A law prof should be able to distinguish between settled and illegitimate!

If someone declared the citizenship of any of you to be suspect and demand to see your birth certificate, wouldn't your immediate reaction be to say, "Fuck you!"?)

Not if it was a requirement for the job and I didn't want the job then yes although I'd probably be more polite.

The issue of his birth certificate is a sideshow in any event. Constitutional requirements notwithstanding, I know far more newly minted citizens from far away places that display more love and patriotism for this nation than the current President has done thus far.

Rather than ask to see his birth certificate, it would have been far more useful and to the benefit of the American electorate if he had been asked 'what qualifies you to lead the nation?' because in all honesty, I didn't see it on the campaign trail and I certainly haven't seen it after one year on the job.

If the worst thing that could have come out of the Bush administration it was him lowering the electoral bar so low that merely sounding intelligent trumps the actual trait.

Florida said... "Sarah Palin has wised up. She understands that even if she takes the high ground, they won't."

Tell me Florida, since when has Sarah ever taken the high ground...or is that the hill where she can see Russia (not Siberia).

the sooner you wake up to the fact that Sarah is an empty hat (all hat and no horse so to speak) the better your life will become. did you ever ask yourself how much you would want to hear from her if McCain, in a moment of complete lunacy, named her to run with him?

Robert Cook said: If someone declared the citizenship of any of you to be suspect and demand to see your birth certificate, wouldn't your immediate reaction be to say, "Fuck you!"?

I have had to show proof of citizenship for every job I've ever had. I've never yelled obscenities at the HR rep asking for it. For a few years, I was the head trainer and responsible for completing I-9 forms on new hires, and had to check the citizenship of several people a week. None of them ever said that to me.

Adele Mundy said... "Hdhouse is the voice of the arrogant elitists who are the backbone of Obama’s America. They are the only ones who can express an opinion or ask a question and the rest of you should shut the fuck up and sit down."

Like Superdad says. All of this happy horsehsit could be put to rest by just disclosing his actual birth certificate and college records. It would a very very simple thing to do. The fact that he won't is what is fueling the controversy.

What DBQ wrote is my position exactly. I do not doubt that Obama was born in Hawaii, and he is an American. In fact, I happen to think people who don't think that to be as deranged as any conspiracist.

BUT it isn't some Andrew Sullivan-fueled obsession to require a President to furnish proof to the PUBLIC that he meets a basic Constitutional qualification to be President.

I believe in Palin's mind this issue becomes clouded with two things, which she mentioned in her response:

1- She's upset, 'til today, at how cavalier the McCain-Palin campaign handled the situation (it must remind her of so many other poorly handled issues, like Reverend Wright-Bill Ayers associations, and her own roll in the campaign).

2- She's still in Mama Bear mode about the Trig doubters.

I do believe Number 1 takes precedence in her mind over Number 2, though. The second just fuels her passion.

Salamandyr said...I was under the impression that Hawaii did release a form of his birth certificate, and that the "long-form" that people clamor for didn't exist at the time. I could be wrong on that, this isn't an issue I follow all that closely.

Wiki gives a pretty good rundown of the theories. In a number of cases contradictory statements have been publicized so it's hard to sort out what information is accurate.

My understand is that Obama has a 'Certificate of Live Birth' aka a short-form birth certificate from Hawaii and that this certificate has been viewed by certain individuals. It has not been provided for open inspection by any interested person, nor has he authorized Hawaiian officials to open their records on his birth for inspection. The short-form is the only form that Hawaii provides on paper at this time.

At the time of Obama's birth in 1961, a paper long-form 'Birth Certificate' with more information than the COLB provides should have been filed. Some news organizations reported that it was destroyed along with other paper long-forms from that time period, though Hawaiian officials have made statements that such records would not have been destroyed and that they have reviewed the actual document with Obama's information. I think this is the record that most people consider this the document that Obama should release, and has chosen not to.

Further confusing the record, a digital image represented as a picture of Obama's Hawaiian COLB appeared on the web but not on any official Obama website. My understanding is that this particular image was faked, in that it is not an image of the COLB in Obama's possession. FactCheck.org has some photos of the COLB that was stored in the Obama campaign HQ but the images don't allow close examination, and as far as I know images of Obama's COLB that would allow close inspection of the entire document have never been posted.

I have no doubt that Obama meets the Constitutional requirements for citizenship but is avoiding the release of the birth certificate because it provides an easy way to defame opponents by linking them to questions about his citizenship status and/or the documents have data that conflicts with how Obama tells his life story.

At this point for people to demand that they see Obama's long form certificate is foolish. And for him to go out of his way to produce it would actually only do two things:1) Embolden half of the right wing who would feel good about forcing the issue.2) Make the other half of the right wing more skeptical because they would think it was a fake certificate crafted in some dark back room last week.

Face it, the birthers will never really be pleased with whatever proof Obama presents them. Therefore he should not play their game. [Plus they did not vote him into the White House]. So, yeah, he should say 'fuck you' to them. Of course, he won't.

I should note too that producing a birth certificate for a job is rare. Most places require an I-9 all you need is a Social Security and Driver's license. Most jobs are not contingent on whether you were born in America.

Obama's mother faked his birth in Hawaii knowing full well 45 yrs later he would run for President. She even put an announcement in the local paper. Cunning!

That's not fair. Obama's mother couldn't even plan out what foreigner she was going to have sex with that week. It was just the luck of the draw that it was someone from Kenya. He could just as easily come from Indonesia, Japan, India or Rigel 5.

Salamandyr...We are talking past one another. You saw any imperfect presentation of an argument as a sloppyness giving of a chance that an enemy will distort those words. I agree. But Sarah says, in effect, that distortion will be done anyway by omission and by rumors and by parody. So risk that and get your message out there. I saw no lack of her easily communicating the basic idea of the Birthers, which is that Obama owes us an answer. Civilised men don't want to risk the Constitutional Crisis that could come out of the wrong answer and say," don't go there"; but the voters are still entitled to an answer. Right? She set forth that combination answer to the Birther dilemma with such skill that it freaked out the thinkers using the Media Template that is placed inside all of our minds. She is answering with the "Render unto Ceasar the things that are Ceasar's" type answer about the coin of politics. She did not discourage either the Oppressed Birthers or say that Obama's being President is illegal.

What may help sell Gov. Palin's book and/or feed a part of the base is more likely to backfire in the selling of her as president. There simply aren't enough people in that part of the base to get her elected. Votes will be needed from others, within and without the GOP.

This sort of talk--whether merely a product of speaking style, a nod at those who sincerely believe Obama is ineligible for office OR at least find it useful for political purposes to profess so, or whatever--is counterproductive for electoral purposes. It bolsters my opinion that Gov. Palin does not actually intend to run for president but rather aspires to be the leader of a movement (which, of course, is 100% fine). The other alternative is that Gov. Palin is actually--to coin a phrase--"dumb," which I do not buy at all.

The birthers feel justified in this inquiry due to:1. That hardly anything is known about this guy other than what he wrote in his hagiographies, which the Press is not interested in verifying.2.The Press, as recently shown with Climategate, is simply uninterested in stories that may undermine their preferred narratives.3. Not many people had heard of Obama prior to 2007.4. The guy most are seeing is not how he was portrayed during the campaign by a sympathetic Press, which opens up a whole can of questions and suspicions.5.To an earlier poster's point: where are his grades? How did he get into Occidental, Columbia, Harvard? Where are his theses? Where are his papers from Illinois State Senate?6. Name one nominated President candidate who was not a known quantity, name one who was such a cipher. The sad feeling is that the US elected a guy because he was (half) black, and people wanted to feel better about themselves for voting for him.

Add this all up, along with the refusal to present the certificate, it gives a rational observer pause.

The birthers feel justified in this inquiry due to:1. That hardly anything is known about this guy other than what he wrote in his hagiographies, which the Press is not interested in verifying.2.The Press, as recently shown with Climategate, is simply uninterested in stories that may undermine their preferred narratives.3. Not many people had heard of Obama prior to 2007.4. The guy most are seeing is not how he was portrayed during the campaign by a sympathetic Press, which opens up a whole can of questions and suspicions.5.To an earlier poster's point: where are his grades? How did he get into Occidental, Columbia, Harvard? Where are his theses? Where are his papers from Illinois State Senate?6. Name one nominated President candidate who was not a known quantity, name one who was such a cipher. The sad feeling is that the US elected a guy because he was (half) black, and people wanted to feel better about themselves for voting for him.

Add this all up, along with the refusal to present the certificate, it gives a rational observer pause.

Adele Mundy said... " Obama's mother couldn't even plan out what foreigner she was going to have sex with that week. It was just the luck of the draw that it was someone from Kenya. He could just as easily come from Indonesia, Japan, India or Rigel 5"

The other alternative is that Gov. Palin is actually--to coin a phrase--"dumb," which I do not buy at all.

She's just sore. An Althouse commenter likened it to President Truman's personality (he once threatened to belt a music critic in the mush when said critic railed against his daughter Margaret's singing debut. He meant it, too).

This is one of the aspects of her personality as a politician, that she has to work on (publicly) before she proves to me she's ready to occupy 1600.

I love passion, I love conviction, but public spats which resemble grudges, no. It's not presidential.

Pffft. No-brainer. The birth circumstances of none of those you list there were ever in question. That's why. Jeez. This is too easy!

And, actually, while I'm thinking about it, I recall that Gerald Ford's birth circumstances were indeed topical and fully hashed out when he succeeded to the presidency because he had been adopted as a child and Ford was not his original name, and I do seem to remember his birth certificate and the adoption decree being to some degree bandied about in the media in 1974.

I say again, there's something a little bit odd about those who aren't at least curious to see Obama's actual birth certificate.

"This is one of the aspects of her personality as a politician, that she has to work on"

I agree. It was also a big stumble in her interview with Katie Couric. Palin got frustrated, and made an issue out of a question that could have served to bolster the exact weakness she was claimed to have. Had she just come up with a list of reading material she would have been much better served. (As an intellectual of British/Irish descent I have some suggestions...)

I think this is an area where she's still very real of a person--she reacts against attacks by becoming defensive and strikes back. But it's a sign she's not really sharpened for national/international debate.

This doesn't mean she loses the reaction, just channels it better and less publicly.

Palin said that Obama's citizenship is a legitimate issue, in the sense that it deserves to be answered; but she also compared those still demanding answers to those who thought Trig wasn't her baby.

And from this, Althouse concludes that she's a "birther". Interesting.

Well, I think that people should be free to celebrate Christmas. Does that make me the Pope, or Jesus Christ himself? Or just a Christian fundamentalist?

OK, Professor, we get it. You've thrown Palin under the bus. Maybe this is your way of striking your pose of cruel neutrality, now that you're finding Obama's policies indefensible; I don't know. But you don't need to start making shit up.

And for the record: "Palin is dumb" and "Palin goes birther" -- those are both simply dishonest. You've used vague unquantifiable terms to leave yourself some wiggle-room, because you're a lawyer; but they're still both bullshit, and I think you know it.

For the record: I'm not the biggest Palin fan. I liked Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney in the last election. But she'd make one hell of a better president than what we have now, despite her lack of Ivy League credentials and her unpolished speaking style and her Yooper accent.

Attack her on her foolish stands on issues. That's all that counts, after all. When she announces, we'll consider her for president; not for a position as an actor portraying a president. It doesn't matter if she looks or sounds the part. What matters are what policies she'll pursue.

Attack her for wanting to drill in ANWR. After all, the science is settled. Attack her for her death panels comment; I mean, who would believe that this administration would do anything to ration out health care?

I'd have order a certified copy of my birth certificate from Indiana were I ever to need it again, having somehow mislaid 15 years ago, right after applying for my marriage license, only the second time in my life I personally needed to produce it (the first was when I applied for my social security card and original drivers permit, in a burst of adult-documentation getting, in late 1976 or early 1977). (I think my mom had to produce it to enroll me in first grade, but I'm not even sure about that.)

vbspurs -- "Yooper" is a term of endearment for those few wretched occupants of the frozen wasteland known as the Upper Penninsula of Michigan. Palin's accent is somewhere between Yooper and Cannuckistani.

It's interesting that those who mock her accent then attack Obama's critics as narrow-minded xenophobes.

PastafarianBut she'd make one hell of a better president than what we have now

Based on what evidence? Seriously. You halfway make some good points and then just throw out nonsense.

You mention that "what matters are what policies she'll pursue."Yes, indeed. And they happen to be right wing policies not unlike President Bush had purside, which in case you recall, were not popular.

So really this comes down to your own right wing opinion. How that opinion would make her somehow better than what we have now is sort of odd. You could make an argument for Romney but not Palin. She is just a pretty face. And you know it.

[Also please note that Insurance companies exist because of death panels. They would not be in business if they did not ration who they cover].

The birth circumstances of none of those you list there were ever in question.

And neither is Obama's.

But please!!! Keep harping on this. It's absolutely vital that you do, the future of the country is at stake. Plus you make all Republicans look insane, for reasons alluded to in Peter's 11:03 AM post.

Sheepman said... "Do 2 unfairs make a fair in her thinking?"She doesn't strike me as one to be bound by logical thinking. She's too maverick for that.

Excellent, perceptive post!

Something her Cultists have to consider. Maybe that was the one thing that drew her fellow "maverick", famous for his own illogical thinking and selectivity in evoking "honor, loyalty!" to select her as VP.

================shoutingthomas said... This post is a dramatic misstatement of what Palin said. She didn't advocate a crusade to find Obama's birth certificate. She only said, in response to a question, that Obama's birth location is a legitimate issue for those who want to pursue it.She didn't say she wanted to pursue the issue.

Matt said: "But she'd make one hell of a better president than what we have now...Based on what evidence?"

Based on the evidence that her stands on issues agree with my own. That's how I prefer to evaluate political candidates; instead of how cool they are, or how well I think they'd do on Jeopardy, or whether I'd like to have a beer with them.

Because I'm a right-wing Rethuglican. Jesus, just look at my profile picture.

should note too that producing a birth certificate for a job is rare. Most places require an I-9 all you need is a Social Security and Driver's license. Most jobs are not contingent on whether you were born in America

In reality, there are many jobs that require proof of citizenship. Most of them have security clearance levels and are generally governmental or government related. Many software firms and research firms require proof of citizenship.

To be employed for a broker/dealer or to sit for the various securities exams, there is no citizenship requirement, however I have had to be fingerprinted, background check with the Department of Justice, credit checks, drug testing each time I've changed broker/dealer firms.

Regarding getting a security clearance.There are three main phases to receiving a security clearance:

The first phase is the application process. This involves verification of U.S. citizenship, fingerprinting and completion of the Personnel Security Questionnaire (SF-86). For detailed application procedures, see Security Clearance Requirements.

The second phase involves the actual investigation of your background. Most of the background check is conducted by the Defense Security Service (DSS).

The final phase is the adjudication phase. The results from the investigative phase are reviewed. The information that has been gathered is evaluated based on thirteen factors determined by the Department of Defense (DoD). Some examples of areas they consider are; allegiance to the United States, criminal and personal conduct, and substance abuse or mental disorders. Clearance is granted or denied following this evaluation process.

Obama couldn't get a security clearance to work for a firm that supplies goods to the military. BUT he is Commander in Chief and we are supposed to STFU and ignore it.

"...I know far more newly minted citizens from far away places that display more love and patriotism for this nation than the current President has done thus far."

How has B.O. shown himself to be any less "patriotic" or to have a gut less full of "love" for this nation than his predecessors?

As far as I can see, he is doing exactly as his predecessors have done: make pretty speeches full of boilerplate about how "great" and "just" and "free" and "virtuous" we are, all the while serving the interests of the corporatocracy in their decades-long campaign to transfer as much of the wealth of the people to themselves as possible as long as there's a nickle left to be taken from someone.

All while murdering people abroad to further fatten the pockets of these swine, under cover of more pretty words about "spreading freedom and democracy" to oppressed peoples around the world.

OT:I had to look up Obama's pitch! (Remember, I really have not watched TV for almost a year). It's only interesting because Media Matters phrases their Youtube video with this headline: Joe Scarborough Mocks Obama Baseball Pitch as a Bit "Dainty". They're keeping the media honest, dontchaknow. Pointing out that right-wing bias towards Obama! Unfortunately, the majority of the teasing is from Willie Geist, who isn't exactly a right-winger. Oh that Media Matters.

I'm with the commenter above who pointed out that Palin actually neatly "split the baby" with her answer. She said she wouldn't pursue the issue, but that people are within their rights to pursue the question if they so choose.

Other than the slobbering Obama sycophants who still venerate Andrew Sullivan for his "truth quest" into Trig's parentage (Wouldn't Levi Johnston have spilled the beans long ago if there were any truth to it? 'Nuff said.), who can argue with that position?

Voters have a right to whatever information they deem necessary before they cast their vote for a particular candidate - especially if that answer goes directly to whether or not they are constitutionally eligible for the job. All she did was reiterate that basic fact.

She didn't endorse it, and those who claim that they're "done with her" now, because of this - were never going to vote for her anyway. They have chosen to read something into her statement which simply isn't there. They always have. They always will.

That's the problem with plain speaking to people who are constantly on the lookout for "dog whistles" and "coded messages." They lack the ability to read the plain meaning of words which are plainly spoken. That's a failing on the part of the listener - not the speaker.

But I guess after so many years of having to puzzle out the meaning of the word "is" and figuring out how many angels the current president is trying to get dancing on the head of a pin with his latest non-reversal, reversal of a previous held, but not-really held, policy it's easy to understand how they are so easily confused by plain English.

How has B.O. shown himself to be any less "patriotic" or to have a gut less full of "love" for this nation than his predecessors?

Well, sitting in a 'church' for 20 years listening to sermons about what a lousy country this is might have tainted his views somewhat.

All while murdering people abroad to further fatten the pockets of these swine, under cover of more pretty words about "spreading freedom and democracy" to oppressed peoples around the world.

Robert, I have to think that your hysterics about this nation and its leaders being nothing more than a pack of murderers is simply a schtick. I say that because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're a decent person and a decent person that fervently believes such things would not willingly reside in such a nation and maintain the mantle of its citizenship.

An Alex Trebeck hosted debate, in the format of Jeopardy, would actually be quite interesting to me. It would remove moderator bias and political speak. The appearance of intellectualism would not matter.

Just get at what a person knows and doesn't know.

Before their Jeopardy showdown I'm not sure too many people would have argued Andy Richter is smarter than Wolf Blitzer. Now, it seems pretty beyond question.

She said she wouldn't pursue the issue, but that people are within their rights to pursue the question if they so choose.

Really? When someone says "I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue", that to me implies a certain amount of approval. If all Palin meant was "we don't lock people up for saying crazy shit like that," perhaps she should have said that instead.

I think I'm with Jim in interpreting her, as usual, clumsily phrased comment to mean voters decide what is and isn't an issue and if something sticks, it's an issue, fair or not. Politics is a rough sport, and the McCain campaign didn't play rough enough with Obama's past -- his political past.

Sullivan is openly doing what he's doing on the question of her son's real mother and the rest of list of what he is calling "lies" for a political reason. He sees her a potential presidential contender. He wants to end her political career. He not only despises her, he thinks she's dangerous, so he's serving up all this stuff in hopes that some of it will stick.

Likewise, the "birthers." They don't really care where Obama was born. If in fact the birthers were correct, they would have only a legalistic case to make against his qualifications for the presidency. Otherwise it's meaningless compared with, say, his associations with Ayers and the Rev. Wright, which arguably provided clues to his policy preferences. But they were hoping that serving up that issue, it might make some xenophobic types vote against Obama. It was a very stupid, self-defeating strategy, just as Sullivan's is a very stupid self-defeating strategy, but we have a First Amendment in this country and we have the popular vote, and every so often a stupid issue decides an election, so someone will always try.

I don't see in Palin's response a desire to embrace or believe what the birthers are claiming. I think she's just saying, "if they can ask me about whether I gave birth to my own son, they can ask questions about where Obama was born. The voters will decide what's relevant."

Gotta love the "I'm not a birther, but . . ." folks. Sort of like saying "I'm not completely insane, just incredibly stupid."

I do have to hand it to Sarah in one regard, though. Her ability to turn anything into one more opportunity to play the victim card is quite amazing. The way she turns a question about Obama and Birthers into one more reminder about how those awful people questioned Trig's parentage is quite exquisite. Unfortunately, that seems to be just about her only skill.

A real test would be asking politicians about the impacts of their plans, what (if any) contingency plans they have, and so on. Really pressing them on that could have a dramatic impact on the U.S. political system, but no one else wants to help promote it.

P.S. If you're a Palin fan, see the link in my previous comment for what you have to do about this latest flap. If you don't do that, this issue will keep coming back to haunt her.

If it's a debate, that's one thing. If it's a question-and-answer gameshow on trivia, that's another.

It matters not one little bit whether the President knows what the Bush Doctrine was, or whether there are 50 or 57 states. It doesn't even matter what their IQ is. (I'd wager Carter's was a notch higher than Reagan's).

What matters is what they'd do when president; and most candidates reveal this in their stated policies. Obama was more vague than others, but some of us could still tell he was a socialist months and years before some very intelligent, well-educated bloggers came to realize it.

Trebeck moderating a debate would have one advantage: If Fred Thompson participated, at some point, he'd say "Trebeck, your mother's a whore."

Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I've pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask... which they have repeatedly. But at no point - not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews - have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.

The American experience was easily understood by natural born, and therfore 99% raised in America, citizens in 1789. The Steamship and later the airliner has blurred this. I recall that FDR had a similar technical issue arise. The reason that it is shameful to get technical is that, like FDR, Obama was elected President. It's too late to get technical in all fairness. If the Supreme Court ruled him technically not elected now, then there would be a war like nothing ever seen since Bush was Selected on a technicality over the winner of the popular vote. NO wise person supports opening this Pandora's Box. Yet the citizens who are angry at Obama for being a Marxist are angry and don't want to wait until 2012. Palin can wait. She might not beat President Biden as easily.

Hasenstab - It wasn't difficult for me, and is shouldn't be difficult for Barack Obama, or anyone else who seeks election to a constitutional office that requires having been born in America.

All too many Americans are ignorant of what constitutes US citizenship. jus sanguinis, citizenship by blood - has always been the primary criteria. jus solis, citizenship by accident of birth locale, was added 80 years after the Constitution.It excluded babies of foreign diplomats..and is still in question if babies of illegals of the spawn of an invading foreign army (if that ever hapened) would be "insta-citizens".This junk was actually resolved long ago. Barry Goldwater ran, even though he wasn't born in a state. George Romney ran and the legal system endorsed his run because though he was born in Mexico, he was born to two American parents in a religious colony and registered as a US citizen, not Mexican one, at birth. McCain was born to two US citizens in US territory, as was the case with Goldwater.

Jus sanguinis - remember the term. It is what all other advanced nations use as the standard, was always the primary way a baby was regarded as a US citizen from the beginning of America. Obama meets that anyways because he had an American momma, was registered as a US citizen, and never renounced his citizenship after reaching legal age.

====================Hiding information from your employer is grounds for firing in the business world. We are his employers and deserve to have full disclosure.

No you are not. You are a small pack of malcontents. Obama was "hired" following a job interview with the US public that happened over two years time. He presented his credentials and McCain's lawyers and various courts that dealt with the birthers deemed them adequate.Obama was "hired" by voters.

He IS in Office, drawing a paycheck.

And the actions of the last lingering "birthers" are like some disgruntled HR person or manager on the hiring committee demanding the hired employee produce the credentials the majority of the hiring committee decided were irrelevant - what the job candidate provided was good enough and was truthful.The disgruntled HR person, manager demanding again that "docucuments" the hiring committee in toto decided were irrelevant to employment - are told to "fuck off" by the new employee and by the firm. They aren't his employers, and they don't "deserve it" as an HR holdout or the manager that didn't like the candidate from the outset...though 4 of the 6 other hiring managers did.They are out of luck, and should have the good grace to shut up - as persisting only makes them more unpopular within the firm (or nation).

Cedarford said: "The disgruntled HR person, manager demanding again that "docucuments" the hiring committee in toto decided were irrelevant to employment - are told to "fuck off" by the new employee and by the firm."

You know, I can't recall a situation I'm familiar with where a firm told their HR person to "fuck off" for requesting documentation.

Now, I have heard of a few situations where a lax HR person didn't request as much documentation on one person as they did on everyone else; and the firm ended up on the ugly side of a discrimination lawsuit. Thus HR's tendency to dot every i and cross every t, and follow rules to the letter, and apply those rules to all employees.

To those who wonder about whether other candidates' birth certificates have been questioned and/or demanded: you don't have to look far. John McCain's was:

The Senate has unanimously declared John McCain a natural-born citizen, eligible to be president of the United States.

That is the good news for the presumptive Republican nominee, who was born nearly 72 years ago in a military hospital in the Panama Canal Zone, then under U.S. jurisdiction. The bad news is that the nonbinding Senate resolution passed Wednesday night is simply an opinion that has little bearing on an arcane constitutional debate that has preoccupied legal scholars for many weeks...

One person who disagrees with that premise is New Hampshire resident Fred Hollander, who has filed a suit in U.S. District Court claiming that the Republican candidate is "not a natural born citizen." In an attempt to prove his argument, the 49-year-old computer programmer filed a subpoena last month seeking McCain's birth certificate.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees citizenship services, declined to hand over copies of the document, saying the subpoena was improperly served....

A senior official of the McCain campaign showed a reporter a copy of the senator's birth certificate issued by Canal Zone health authorities, recording his birth in the Coco Solo "family hospital."

Jus sanguinis - remember the term. It is what all other advanced nations use as the standard, was always the primary way a baby was regarded as a US citizen from the beginning of America. Obama meets that anyways because he had an American momma, was registered as a US citizen, and never renounced his citizenship after reaching legal age.

So under jus sanguinis, was Obama entitled to Kenyan citizenship too? i.e., dual citizenship? Could this be clouding the issue?

Florida said... "Is Barack Obama really an American is a fair question, since the Constitution says that only a naturalized American can be the President."

ahhh no it doesn't. naturalized is not in the constitution. of american citizens is as is 35 years or older and living here for 14 years. did you get your copy of the constitution from glenn beck or something?

Arturius said...I would argue that the media didn't scrutinize either candidate although I think a bit more emphasis on the pilot than the co-pilot is warranted.

While the media was rather fawning with Obama, Obama was subjected to scrutiny over the entire length of the Democratic Party primary race. The Clinton people, the GOP, etc, had plenty of time to investigate Obama and force their concerns into the media, not to mention how Obama took part in many more live debates and so forth where he had to answer wide-ranging questions. For example, the public was scrutinizing Obama's foreign policy ideas long before Sarah Palin had any idea she'd even need to have foreign policy ideas (you know, back when the only statement Palin had ever uttered in public about Iraq was that we needed an exit strategy).

The co-pilot can become pilot at any moment, especially when the pilot is elderly.

Palin - a real nutcase dummy - came very close to being the most powerful person on earth. This should make us all lose sleep at night.

hdhouse said: "naturalized is not in the constitution. of american citizens is as is 35 years or older and living here for 14 years."

Two points -- first:

MadisonMan already pointed out that the constitution says "natural-born", not naturalized, clearly a slip by Florida, who knows what the requirement is.

Second:

Look at that sentence. "...is as is..."? What the hell does that even mean? I mean, if you're going to come to these comments to a) correct another commenter on what's clearly a minor slip-up and b) cite Palin's inarticulate speaking and writing as evidence of her stupidity, then you should probably be a little more careful yourself, lest you look like an asshoooooole.

What a nutcase. She doesn't want the government to institute single-payer healthcare. She doesn't want cap-and-tax, and instead just wants to poison us all with lethal carbon dioxide gas. She doesn't want card check. She'd appoint people to the supreme court who just look at the simple meaning of the words in the constitution, instead of allowing it to breathe and grow and metastasize and spew fluids. That's right, she would smother the constitution. She'd murder it.

What a nutcase dummy. She doesn't even have a degree from Harvard. Just not quite our type of people, here at the Althouse comments section.

I said: While the media was rather fawning with Obama, Obama was subjected to scrutiny over the entire length of the Democratic Party primary race.... Palin - a real nutcase dummy - came very close to being the most powerful person on earth. This should make us all lose sleep at night.

And I'll add: While Obama probably should've been scrutinized more by the press, most Americans were at least able to confidently determine that Obama isn't a deranged lunatic and ignoramus. Obama may be doing lots of things people dislike, but there'd be a whole other level of worries if Sarah Palin were the most powerful person on earth.

Now that Sarah Palin has explicitly disavowed birtherism, can we stop accusing her of being a birther?

"Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask… which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States."

Pastafarian said... Cedarford said: "The disgruntled HR person, manager demanding again that "docucuments" the hiring committee in toto decided were irrelevant to employment - are told to "fuck off" by the new employee and by the firm."

You know, I can't recall a situation I'm familiar with where a firm told their HR person to "fuck off" for requesting documentation.

We had a case where an HR Rep who opposed hiring a new employee born in Yugoslavia,asked the new employee after hire, to produce documents the HR person thought should be demanded but were rejected by the Head of HR and the hiring committee. (His Yugo military records).It was her crusade to reverse a "wrong hire". She was told to shut the fuck up, go back to her office...by Legal....which apparantly was much blunter about a major harassment/attempt to engage in wrongful termination suit - and the can of worms it would open with the job status of All Employees. The new employee, had of course politely declined her, the manager he worked for when informed was less polite...and higher on the food chain, the HR Head and Legal supposedly did rip her a new asshole and say, "fuck off, stay in your office."

With Obama, he holds elected office. He was hired. The decision is done. Attempts by some to undermine that, claim thet are the "real employers and final decision-makers" not the collective will of the people who hired him - is counterproductive and will just hurt them, not Obama.

MATT, I explicitly stated that the issue of Obama's birth is settled and that the issue is STUPID (like you) but Althouse was arguing it is irrelevant, and that is different. Only a STUPID FOOL LIKE MATT would conclude I was a birther from what I wrote.

I wanna thank Sarah Palin for putting the last nail into her coffin today.

As the hype on her book dies down, she gets herself back in the press with some more crazy talk. This time, even some of the righty blogs are disturbed (see Patterico's Pontifications), while others are in a panic to spin some damage control for her. She has officially jumped the shark. :)

Oh, sure, she'll still run around making dough off the Religious Right, but she'll never win high national office.

As you can see hd, no slur is too low to be heaped on our Sarah's head from the bully boys on the left like the Randy Andy and the Oaf. So in turn no slander is too base no innuendo so foul that we can not lay it on the head of the One.

chickenlittle said..."I wanna thank Sarah Palin for putting the last nail into her coffin today."

LOL. We'll know that's true only when guys like you forget to write things like that.

Well, I thought she officially destroyed her chances of winning high national office when she quit her job in Alaska. But, in case there was any doubt about that, we can count on her to keep making herself less and less acceptable as a national candidate.

Cross-posted - and edited - from DPUD. But oh-so relevant to another of my favourite blogs.

With all the absolutely unhinged garbage that's been thrown her way from the mainstream journos, let alone the truly insane $hit from the web's crazier cesspools, I can imagine that the temptation to give back a little sometimes is a bit much to resist.

...but all I actually read into that exchange is she was equating full disclosure over one kind of public "record" as being the same as another.

To rephrase her answer: "If someone regards the question of Trig's birth source as legitimate, than it is equally legitimate to question ANYone's birth source." Fair is fair.

She made it a point to counter the question with the observation of the lunatic fringe Trig fascination, after all ...if nothing else, it's probably evidence she's at least familiear with Sully's unceasing torrent of bilge barf.

...which makes this just another version of tit-for-tat. Little of her? Maybe. Understandable? Oh yeah.

So she came out in favour of tit-for-tat, is all. BFD. The Left will howl about it (they've never stopped howling about Trig, either, so their credibility has long since been self-immolated); it seemed a reasonable enough response to being pressed on the issue to me, if somewhat ill-phrased.

(And no, I don't give a fiddler's frack about the fricking birth certificate. I think O's already enough of a divisive lying two-faced sonuvabitch pr!ck without adding in the distraction of that particular piece of Soros-inspired misdirection. But the fracktard "conservative" a$$hole host of the show pressed her on the subject ...and keerist, I can see pissed off irony when I read it.)

Full disclosure: Yes, I like her. Yes I will vote for her. Yes I will work for her campaign. Yes I put my money where my mouth is. No I'm not unbiased.

With all the absolutely unhinged garbage that's been thrown her way from the mainstream journos, let alone the truly insane $hit from the web's crazier cesspools, I can imagine that the temptation to give back a little sometimes is a bit much to resist.

I'm trying to think of the worst thing a mainstream journo has thrown her way. She's never had to give a press conference with live bullets....what was the most unfair question asked.....?

Madison Man saidAll righty then. The existence of the birther movement means we can all question Trig's parentage.

Of course that's what it means. You and your ilk have been doing that from day one and nothing anyone said could stop it. No request for decency or forbearance was heeded. Not even the weak mewling of the One. He could have put a stop to it if he really wanted to do so. But he didn't. Sarah has to respond by using the "Chicago way."

Nope. It was not resolved. It just never became an actual issue because Goldwater, Romney and McCain didn't win.

This should not be a partisan issue. We have a constitutional requirement and we should either enforce it or change it. I have no idea if Obama is or is not a "natural born citizen" as the constitution requires. As far as I understand the laws regarding people born in the Canal Zone (i.e McCain) they are citizens but are not natural born. Thus, McCain is not eligible. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html

To this literal day, it's possible to have a child whose certificate will record no attending physician or midwife (see "home birth")--and, on top of that, no father listed either if the mother wasn't married to him at either the time of conception or the time of the birth, unless the father and mother sign a document of acknowledgment. Many years from now, people might want to take the omission of such information as evidence that the birth certificate isn't the "real," legal one. That wouldn't make their conclusion necessarily right.

I have no idea of the exact circumstances of Obama's birthing. But I accept the jurisdiction and statement of the state of Hawaii.

As I would that of the state of Illinois, for example, in the case of a friend of mine whose 7-month-old daughter was born at home (or so the mother says), with no attending physician or midwife (husband was there). The parents filed the relevant information after the fact. I suppose they could have faked that info and maybe birthed the baby elsewhere and just said she was born at home in Illinois. Well, let's just hope she never runs for president (and that two of her older siblings don't either).

"then there would be a war like nothing ever seen since Bush was Selected on a technicality over the winner of the popular vote."Technicality? How so? The rules have always been electoral votes. It's like the world series where one team wins 4 games to 3, but in the first game the score was 35-0 in favor of the eventual loser. Did that team lose the world series on a technicality? Back to the topic, I wonder who would insist on a birth certificate should the Republicans field a guy who grew up in another country?

But very fun reading The Corner today on how the jobless claims from a high of 700k when Bush left, to 11k today, is bad news. Hilarious.

because it is 11K more people in addition to the 700K you are talking about. Why do you think 11K more people out of work is Hilarious? I suspect they agree it is bad news too. What do YOU think it means?

My understanding is that Obama spent four years--ages 6-10--in Indonesia. He was in the U.S. otherwise. Just as an aside, why does it seem some people speak of his upbringing as if it was largely in a foreign country? Hawaii was already a state--only by a couple of years, I grant you--when Obama was born. Hawaii's not a foreign country. And four years is not an entire upbringing.

Ummm, I'm not sure if you are joking, but McCain would not have been the GOP nominee if he was not eligible. Clearly he was eligible. In fact, this wasn't an issue at all except with some really far out left wingers. It shouldn't be an issue with Obama either. If it was he wouldn't have been nominated. He met all the requirments that were needed at the time.

"My understanding is that Obama spent four years--ages 6-10--in Indonesia. " That's my understanding also. That his father lived with his mother until well after he was born before he packed up and moved to Kenya. (the father). Its the inexplicable refusal to release the long form, the school records etc.

Ilk refers to In Like Kind. Which you have a multitude on these threads. Although you do disguise your proclivities under a thin veneer of civility, none the less you eat out of the same bowl as slobbering fanatics such as the Loafing Oaf. You of course being the gentle and meandering sheepdog to the Oaf ‘s slobbering three legged Labrador, Alpaliberals whiny whippet and hdhouse’s senile and feces caked cocker spaniel.

You sir are a cad and a bounder. Your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries.

Why should anyone want to look at school records for any candidate? That's a serious question.

If you were to look at my school records (assuming you mean college), you'd see a lot of As and Bs, some Cs and 2 Ds. What does that mean about me, now, almost 30 years later? Nothing.

I tell my kids all the time (well, not quite, but I've mentioned it) that no one in ten years will care one bit about the grades they get in school. Sure, it helps you get to someplace you want to go -- or think you do -- but after you get there, the grades are largely irrelevant.

The focus on College grades is from people (IMO) who want to think they are better than someone because their grades were better, when in reality the grades are meaningless and a non-issue. It's really what you do with your life after College that matters. If you are still focused on your college GPA years after leaving, you haven't done much with your life.

Grades in School.Funny, but [as you know] the Right Wing was pretty silent when it came to Bush's grades in school. Suddenly, they now insist that grades and transcripts - and all that school stuff - are important.

Matt said...Funny, but [as you know] the Right Wing was pretty silent when it came to Bush's grades in school. Suddenly, they now insist that grades and transcripts - and all that school stuff - are important.

Careful. My recollection is that John Kerry had lower IQ scores than Bush, and Kerry's grades weren't so hot either.

But please!!! Keep harping on this. It's absolutely vital that you do, the future of the country is at stake. Plus you make all Republicans look insane, for reasons alluded to in Peter's 11:03 AM post.

Wait, MadisonMan, are you saying his comment changes your assessment of the "New Republican party":

MadisonMan said... The America Palin knows is the one that will pay for the ramifications of all her decisions. I want to live longer! Let's have the government pay for it! I want to have unprotected sex when the odds are high(er) that my child will have developmental issues. Let's have the government pay for it! I want a bridge that goes to a nearly uninhabited island! Let's have the government pay for it!

Oh, and I don't want any tax hike to pay for all these things that I want the government to pay for.

Welcome to the new Republican Party. 8/8/09 10:44 AM

I think comments like yours, where you get angry that Sarah Palin wants to live a long life and where you get enraged because she dares to have sex with her husband, do a pretty good job of making Democrats look obsessed and insane.

If you were to look at my school records (assuming you mean college), you'd see a lot of As and Bs, some Cs and 2 Ds. What does that mean about me, now, almost 30 years later? Nothing.

Obama's grades go to the narrative of him possibly not being as smart as people take him to be, if there are some bad grades there. It also would show what kinds of courses he took at Occidental and Columbia (which could be potentially embarrassing, if they're of the "Socialism in the Global sphere" type classes).

But despite this "gotcha" angle, it's also about secrecy and complete blank slateness which he projects. Who is he? What does he believe in? Why is there so little paper trail? Would any other politician have such lack of scrutiny when running for president, than this man had? Is it because he's black and journalists are afraid of looking racist? Or is it because they preferred him to win the Presidency?

You can see the same type of collusion in ClimateGate. They do not report what they consider hurtful to their world view.

And obviously, candidates will not incriminate themselves if they do not feel media hounding them to produce information.

As conservatives, we see this clearly and it fuels 99% of the requests to see that original certificate of birth.

I do not expect to win Madison Man. No one’s opinion is ever changed by these threads. If anything it hardens.

Except of course for Loafing Oaf who never has anything harden. This is the source of most of his animus towards Sarah Palin and all other attractive women. I have seen it so many times that I have lost count.